Started By
Message

re: Global warming - climate panel sees dire future

Posted on 9/26/19 at 11:31 am to
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
119578 posts
Posted on 9/26/19 at 11:31 am to
quote:

Can we also agree on where the overwhelmingly majority of said carbon comes from?



Over 90% of CO2 emissions into our atmosphere originates in the oceans.
Posted by moneyg
Member since Jun 2006
56947 posts
Posted on 9/26/19 at 11:34 am to
quote:

So we outsource all our production to China and then blame them for the consequences? "It's not us, it's them!"

That is not how leaders behave.



So, you are anti-globalism?
Posted by TigerChief10
Member since Dec 2012
10858 posts
Posted on 9/26/19 at 11:43 am to
quote:

quote:A new batch of 5,000 emails among scientists central to the assertion that humans are causing a global warming crisis were anonymously released to the public yesterday, igniting a new firestorm of controversy nearly two years to the day after similar emails ignited the Climategate scandal. Three themes are emerging from the newly released emails: (1) prominent scientists central to the global warming debate are taking measures to conceal rather than disseminate underlying data and discussions; (2) these scientists view global warming as a political “cause” rather than a balanced scientific inquiry and (3) many of these scientists frankly admit to each other that much of the science is weak and dependent on deliberate manipulation of facts and data. Interesting article. Forbes

Antifa-Salmon wont reply to this post
Posted by SoulGlo
Shinin' Through
Member since Dec 2011
17248 posts
Posted on 9/26/19 at 12:19 pm to
quote:

Carbon is a greenhouse gas, the more of it you have in the atmosphere the more heat is trapped. This can have varying effect on the atmosphere, the most trackable of which is a steady increase in heat energy trapped in the atmosphere. Our current sources of energy release carbon into the atmosphere which makes these effects worse.


Can we agree on this?




No.

You people don't give a shite about dynamics. Humans are a drop in the bucket for CO2 and "greenhouse gas" production.

At any rate, what is CO2 to plants? Food, or at least a component of it. What happens when there's a lot of food in nature? It gets eaten. The CO2 levels now are not even mid range when compared to history and the evolution of plant life. We have a long way to go before we can even sniff a whiff of being close to entering a realm of dangerous levels.

The idea that human CO2 is warming the planet requires the same logic as a tax and spend liberal pushing for tax increases...

"If 10 people have $1,000,000 and we tax half of it next year, we will have 10x$500,000=$5,000,000!" And they go to spend it.

What actually happens is that those rich folks move their money before the taxes take effect and there's only a small portion left... if any at all.

For the CO2 "problem" to get to bad levels, we not only have to up our production of it, but also strip the Earth of anything that consumes it.... and also decimate another couple levels of the balancing forces.

This is ALL a political movement turned religion. Nothing more, nothing less.
This post was edited on 9/26/19 at 12:20 pm
Posted by Janky
Team Primo
Member since Jun 2011
35957 posts
Posted on 9/26/19 at 12:19 pm to
quote:


Antifa-Salmon wont reply to this post


. I don't think he has been back since I posted it. All of the thumpers completely ignored it.
Posted by RogerTheShrubber
Juneau, AK
Member since Jan 2009
263364 posts
Posted on 9/26/19 at 12:28 pm to
quote:

So pulling crap tons of it out of the ground and pumping it into the air in a very short period of time is a little dangerous.


Imagine if we hadn't caved in to environmentalists 40 years ago and went with nuclear power instead of having to burn fossil fuels for power.

The world would be much different.
Posted by xXLSUXx
New Orleans, LA
Member since Oct 2010
10312 posts
Posted on 9/26/19 at 12:55 pm to
quote:

This climate change bugabaloo is as much a religion to some of you as any other.

Without looking it up can you fully explain the science behind your belief, or are you just trusting opinions from people you don’t know?



Literally this whole thread.
Posted by PT24-7
Member since Jul 2013
4396 posts
Posted on 9/26/19 at 1:08 pm to
that was hilarious
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
119578 posts
Posted on 9/26/19 at 1:21 pm to
From the climategate scandal:



So they did this:

This post was edited on 9/26/19 at 1:25 pm
Posted by Teague
The Shoals, AL
Member since Aug 2007
21706 posts
Posted on 9/26/19 at 1:29 pm to
quote:

Why don't you go look up how many tons of CO2 are emitted from natural, non-man-made sources and try again when you aren't so scientifically illiterate...


So, you, the "scientifically literate", think nature suddenly started releasing unprecedented levels of CO2 in the past 50 years?



We ALL know why people don't want to believe in climate change. Because it's been made political. And people are bat-shite crazy about their politics. Why is it political? Because people in government are paid millions by fossil fuel interests.

There are no trillion dollar companies paying politicians to pretend global warming is real. There is no way to get almost every scientist in the world to agree. They can't all be bought. They work for various organisations. They're researching various things. They have various goals. Nothing would unite them all, except evidence.

If the overwhelming majority of the world's scientists told you that eating a spoonful of powdered milk every day would ensure you never got cancer, you'd accept it as fact and do it. Because, your favorite politicians aren't paid by the anti-powdered milk companies, and therefore don't have any reason to lie and steer you away from it.

I admit that I probably lean more left than the vast majority of people here. But, I'm not a registered democrat. I've only ever voted for one democrat for president in my life. And, I have a lot of views that align more with the right. But, the environment should not be a political issue. It wouldn't be a political issue, if fossil fuels weren't buying our politics.

This post was edited on 9/26/19 at 1:51 pm
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
119578 posts
Posted on 9/26/19 at 1:32 pm to
quote:

So, you, the "scientifically literate", think nature suddenly started releasing unprecedented levels of CO2 in the past 50 years?



We ALL know why people don't want to believe in climate change. Because it's been made political. And people are bat-shite crazy about their politics. Why is it political? Because people in government are paid millions by fossil fuel interests.

There are no trillion dollar companies paying politicians to pretend global warming is real. There is no way to get almost every scientist in the world to agree. They can't all be bought. They work for various organisations. They're researching various things. They have various goals. Nothing would unite them all, except evidence.

If the overwhelming majority of the world's scientists told you that eating a spoonful of powdered milk every day would ensure you never got cancer, you'd accept it as fact and do it. Because, your favorite politicians aren't paid by the powdered milk companies, and therefore don't have any reason to lie and steer you away from it.

I admit that I probably lean more left than the vast majority of people here. But, I'm not a registered democrat. I've only ever voted for one democrat for president in my life. And, I have a lot of views that align more with the right. But, the environment should not be a political issue. It wouldn't be a political issue, if fossil fuels weren't buying our politics.


Admonishes posters for talking no science, then ensues to talk no science.
Posted by Centinel
Idaho
Member since Sep 2016
43480 posts
Posted on 9/26/19 at 1:34 pm to
quote:

It wouldn't be a political issue, if fossil fuels weren't buying our politics.


Fossil fuels didn't have to buy our politics. The environmentalists themselves guaranteed our reliance on fossil fuels for the foreseeable future.

Posted by Teague
The Shoals, AL
Member since Aug 2007
21706 posts
Posted on 9/26/19 at 1:37 pm to
quote:

The environmentalists themselves guaranteed our reliance on fossil fuels for the foreseeable future.


Even if that were true, what does it have to do with fixing it? Whataboutsim.
Posted by Janky
Team Primo
Member since Jun 2011
35957 posts
Posted on 9/26/19 at 1:38 pm to
quote:

what does it have to do with fixing it?


What is there to fix?
Posted by Space Cadet
Member since Sep 2019
446 posts
Posted on 9/26/19 at 1:41 pm to
THERE'S NO PROBLEM TO FIX!!! AND IF THERE IS A PROBLEM THEN IT'S NOT AS BAD AS THE CORRUPT SCIENTISTS SAY IT IS!!! AND THEY HAVE KIDS SAYING THINGS!!!!! AND IF YOU WANT TO FIX STUFF OR MAKE NEW TECHNOLOGY THEN YOU'RE A SOCIALIST!!!!! AND IT'S YOUR RELIGION!!!!!


Think that covers everything.
Posted by Teague
The Shoals, AL
Member since Aug 2007
21706 posts
Posted on 9/26/19 at 1:41 pm to
quote:

What is there to fix?


I'm not going to argue with you about what you know that climate scientists don't.
Posted by Centinel
Idaho
Member since Sep 2016
43480 posts
Posted on 9/26/19 at 1:42 pm to
quote:

Even if that were true, what does it have to do with fixing it? Whataboutsim.




It is most certainly true. If it weren't for environmentalists, we could be powering the majority of the grid off next generation nuclear reactors like LFTRs.

They scream about clean energy and reliance on fossil fuels, and then they scream against nuclear energy.

So, we just keep on burning fossil fuels.

Posted by chRxis
None of your fricking business
Member since Feb 2008
23810 posts
Posted on 9/26/19 at 1:45 pm to
quote:

Global warming

i don't believe in this....

quote:

climate change

i do...


the earth has always undergone warming and cooling phases... but some of the things we are seeing with weather patterns, extremes, etc. have never been seen in recorded history... that's hard to argue with, because that shite doesn't "just happen", unlike the aforementioned phases....
Posted by Teague
The Shoals, AL
Member since Aug 2007
21706 posts
Posted on 9/26/19 at 1:46 pm to
quote:

It is most certainly true. If it weren't for environmentalists, we could be powering the majority of the grid off next generation nuclear reactors like LFTRs.

They scream about clean energy and reliance on fossil fuels, and then they scream against nuclear energy.

So, we just keep on burning fossil fuels.


I agree that the left balks at nuclear energy. However, so does the right.

But, we're not even at the point of discussing that. We can't even get people to believe what actual scientists are screaming at them. Because some fricking politician is bought by oil and coal companies.

We're not discussing all the ways that "environmentalists" have fricked up. We're discussing how we can't get people to believe basic science, because the team they cheer for doesn't like what it will do to their jobs.
Posted by Space Cadet
Member since Sep 2019
446 posts
Posted on 9/26/19 at 1:46 pm to
Is anyone hear arguing against nuclear energy? It's going to be a huge part of any progress we make on this. We need more nuclear plants.
Jump to page
Page First 14 15 16 17 18 19
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 16 of 19Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram